Henry Miller Books

These days, odds are quite good that the typical high school student will be assigned to read some sort of biography and will have to report on its content. Publishers have responded in kind by releasing many biographical series targeted at the teenage audience. Though the quality of such books varies, the volumes always meet the teachers' 100-page minimum and offer at least a modicum of academic credibility.

Here's one of the better samplings covering the life of Henry David Thoreau. Miller begins by focusing on the Walden Pond experience, and then retreats to cover the usual background information. He's already snagged his readers and waits until page 20 to broach the concept of Transcendentalism, which is probably a good tactic. No sense in bringing it up earlier and running the risk of having the young readers stop turning pages because they don't understand the vocabulary. While this book is obviously not an in-depth literary or biographical analysis, the author doesn't dumb down the information and doesn't approach it in an overtly scholarly fashion. Facts and stories are told in an interesting and personal way, using a conversational style and often adding Thoreau's own words to illustrate his observations and philosophies.

Some devoted academics might scoff at Miller's interpretation of one of Thoreau's most-dissected statements: that of losing "a hound, a bay horse, and a turtle-dove." The contemporary take is that the tale is merely about life's losses. Here, Miller says the trio "represents the spiritual reality behind nature." What? Hmmm. That excerpt aside, the author is obviously a Thoreau fan and did not merely churn this book out to meet a publisher's criteria. His concluding statement is "If our planet is to survive to celebrate the bicentennial of his death in the year 2062, the world would do well to heed his vision." Indeed.

A sole criticism of this work is that Thoreau's statements are used without footnotes. While this technique makes for easier adolescent reading, it can be vexing to anyone wanting to locate the original source of those quotes. A three-page narrative bibliography is quite useful, as is the full index. School and public librarians would do well to make this title available to their patrons. It serves a population that's not quite ready for the standard full-bodied HDT biographies by Canby, Harding or Richardson.

This history of the early years of the Dallas Opera covers the period from 1957, when the Dallas Civic Opera was inaugurated by Lawrence Kelly and Nicola Rescigno, to 1976, two years after Kelly's death. If nothing else, the profusion of production photographs, many rarely seen, would make this book worth perusal. Ronald L. Davis is a professor of history who has written about opera before. His workmanlike writing style cannot entirely avoid the occasional feeling of simply plodding through descriptions of the productions, with these singers, that producer, that director, et al. Still, overall, he manages to convey the excitement of these years, when the Dallas company brought stars of the caliber of Callas, Sutherland and Zeffirelli, in operas that the Met and other mainstream companies wouldn't touch, such as Alcina, Medea and L'Italiana in Algeri. The brashness and charm of Lawrence Kelly, whose vision started the company and whose charm and persuasiveness often kept it going through financial crises that would have sunk other organizations, emerges clearly as well.

First I want to state that this is a very fine biography, the author (Miller's son) does an admirable job of showing the many different sides and personalities of a multi-gifted woman whose life spanned the tumultuous revolution of women's roles in society. But Lee Miller led a very complicated and somewhat contradictory life and the author manages (artifully, I admit)to avoid probing too deeply into the dark corners that would truly flesh out her life. There are crucial points in the book where a gentle fog of vagueness creeps in where an objective biographer would have strove for clarity, i.e. what exactly was the nature of her relationship with her father? He clearly had a huge role in her life and career (he began photographing her nude at a very early age)but the treatment of their relationship is ginger to say the very least. But issues outside the family are well covered, inside not so much. So to sum up, a good general bio but it is neither too critical nor too in depth on certain issues.

this 'passionate appreciaton' is invaluable read for any true lawrence enthusiast and student; of course it obliquely sheds much light on that great strange oddity of contemporary american literature, henry miller of brooklyne, ny. both he and his former friend anais nin were of course heavily and massively influenced by lawrence's genius. (who wasn't?)
at times, however, miller's gets bogged in his almost mandatory verbosity, he looses track as to what he was so passionately writing about, but over all it is worth reading this book in order to better understand his creative mechanism as well. the great and most amazing thing about this is that it was written some seventy five years back! the proper understanding of lawrence's influence, to my thinking, has not even begun yet, and miller was one of the pioneers of that understanding.

Unlike other orders in the past that sometimes had very long and drawn out waiting periods, I received this order promptly and was very satisfied with my purchase.

Daisy Miller, Henry James's short novel, leaves one with mixed feelings as the range of evaluations demonstrates. That is because the novella is not what it appears to be--a light romantic tale of a young American girl doing what she pleases in Europe. The story is narrated by Winterbourne, an American who appears to be a student visiting his aunt, Mrs. Costello, at a resort in Switzerland. There he meets the Miller family, nine year old Randolph who has a mind of his own (and displays it), his mother and the irrepressible Daisy. She is an unabashed flirt who does what she pleases regardless of what anyone (especially the snobbish Europeans) think. Winterbourne becomes infatuated with her despite his rather stiff demeanor. He asks his aunt to meet her but she refuses, saying Daisy is too "common."

Nevertheless Winterbourne follows Daisy to Rome where she is having an affair with a debonair Italian, Giovanelli. Winterbourne sees him as a fortune seeker (the Miller family is quite wealthy), but is also motivated by his own interest in Daisy.

The novella comes to a sudden, tragic and unexpected ending, given the light-hearted tone of Daisy's behaviors.

I think the book is worth reading as an example of James' comparisons of European and American culture and for the character of Daisy who is one of the most delightful characters in literature. I rate it at four stars, but it could just as easily be three.

A few thoughts and considerations on Daisy Miller: A Study.

Though called 'Daisy', her given name is Annie P. Miller in this short novel from 1878.

A fact seldom mentioned is that Daisy Miller was also written as a play, but due to producers in both New York and London rejecting it, it never made it to the stage. Some of Henry James's other writings, however, did get produced as stage plays.

Daisy Miller sold better than Henry James's "previous books". Was fairly well accepted in America but did stir some controversy.

Though Daisy Miller is a novel, the book has its basis in fact: while in Rome in 1877, Henry James heard a story through gossip of an American girl who had "provoked the general disapproval of Anglo-American society in Rome." From this he developed the short novel, Daisy Miller.

Henry James and his brother, William, had visited the Colosseum one night a few years prior to writing Daisy Miller, and Henry. especially struck by the ruins and "sad beauty" of both the Colosseum and Forum, decided to place Daisy in danger within its location.

The fever spoken of in Daisy Miller was "a rather frequent affliction of that time". Years later Henry James's fellow writer and friend, Edith Wharton, wrote a story entitled "Roman Fever". The malaria or 'fever' did actually exist and Americans were very susceptible to its affects.

Much mention of the words "a study" has been written about here. Henry James chose these words to symbolize as in a pencil drawing, or work of art, attempting to offer a portrait of sorts within the written work. Later between 1907 and 1909, when issuing the 24 volume 'New York Edition' revision of The Novels and Tales of Henry James, Henry James removed "A Study" from the reissued Daisy Miller. He felt it no longer held any significant purpose, yet to this date the words "A Study" is to found as part of the title. Rather strange since "the Master" had requested the words "A Study" be removed in 1909!

In a letter, Henry James called Daisy Miller "the little tragedy of light, thin, natural, unsuspecting, creature being sacrificed as it were to a social rumpus that went quite over her head and to which she stood in no measurable relation". In short, she really never got any of it.

As Leon Edel writes of Daisy: "is she a flirt or is she virtuous. Is she innocent or is she hard and cynical?". As Henry James wrote in a later tale concerning another character, "You admire her-you adore her, and secretly you mistrust her."

Finally, William James, Henry's older brother, objected to the ending of Daisy Miller "which seemed to him frivolous." As Henry James had to do with at least one other tale reaching the stage as a play, the ending had to be rewritten as a happy, rather than a sad one. Should Daisy Miller ever reached the stage as James intended, he might have had to rewrite a much different, happier ending to Daisy Miller.

Daisy Miller is not only the shortest of Henry James's works but it probably is the most frequently read and possibly the most popular. It represents a subject close to Henry James's heart as the flood of millions of Americans poured into Europe got on his nerves to such degree that he eventually refused to revisit Italy, and was caused to move from London due noise, crowds, etc., to reside at Lamb House in Rye. So, in Daisy Miller you not only have a tale of moral expression, you also have James's pet peeve dealing with too many people, too much noise, in one place, too close to him.

But the novel has the kaleoscope ability to be many things to many readers and remains very contemporary in its style of writing down to this day. No small accomplishment after passage of approximately 130 years!

Semper Fi.

I recommend Daisy Miller for anyone who's grown tired of American arrogance and exceptionalism, particularly for Americans who have lost sight of what's reasonably lovable in our own culture. This brash and irreverent naif, vacationing in Europe, and her affair with the stodgy and non-committal Winterbourne embodies the best of American innocence and idealism. Daisy remains James' best-loved character, perhaps because we need her so much, to remind us that our uninhibited lack of sophistication is at the heart of our American identity.

I enjoyed most of this novel while I was reading, and I think that the writing is technically proficient. The end was a great disappointment, and left me wondering why I spend the time reading this mercifully short piece. At least I can say that I've read some of Henry James.

My first problem with the book may be the result of not understanding the time period. I am not certain how Americans expected young women to behave, although I understand that their customs were much less restrictive than Europeans. I therefore don't know whether Daisy is rebellious, or reckless, or simply behaving in a manner that she understands to be suitable and many Europeans (American Euro-wannabees) misinterprete. Is the problem just that Winterbourne and Daisy don't understand each other's cultural assumptions, or that he is really reacting to Daisy's personality? Given the reactions of some of the Europeans, is Winterbourne following their codes of behavior more stringently than they do, perhaps fawning on Europeans by an excessive zeal to prove that he is like them? I am therefore at a loss to understand what point Miller is trying to make. Is the issue really the virtues of one set of social customs over another, or is it just the difficulties that arise from misunderstanding? I give this 3 stars rather than 2 because it might have made sense if I were reading it when it was written.

My other problem may be idiosyncratic: THIS IS A SPOILER. I have little sympathy for anyone foolish enough to "die for love", especially a brief romance. Winterbourne and Daisy obviously aren't suited for each other, and the solution is to move on, not become suicidal. I really don't see their incompatibility as a moral issue on either side. If Winterbourne really can't respect Daisy then he does well not to become seriously involved with her. If he is stuffy and priggish, well, that's how he is and he should choose a compatible wife. When it comes to a serious commitment like marriage, it is necessary to acknowledge how one really is, not delude oneself about how one ought to be.

If James' point, as reviewers seem to indicate, is to expose the difference between European and USA manners, the story is not well-constructed, since Daisy's critics are mostly expat Americans; real Europeans are more tolerant of her. The ending seems a bit bizarre. Such misunderstandings have been the basis of comedies of manners or novels of personal angst, but the ending to this novel is too melodramatic and contrived. In Jane Austen: Women, Politics, and the Novel, Claudia Johnson has some acerbic things to say about the tradition of killing off women disappointed in love. Does James mean to criticize Winterbourne? It would have been more satisfying (and reasonable) if Winterbourne later realized what a fool he had been when he meets up with the happily married, brilliant hostess Daisy Marriedname, famous beauty and wit, perhaps married to a real European who finds her refreshing.

This can't be Henry Miller, or if it is in any way, he merely embellished on its original incarnation. Like another reviewer said, if you don't get turned on reading this, maybe you're dead. It does give explicit descriptions of sexual exploits. However if you've read the Rosy Crucifixion trilogy (Sexus, Plexus, Nexus) or Tropic of Cancer and Tropic of Capricorn and enjoyed those remarkable works of literature, I'm afraid you'll be disappointed in this. Under the Roofs of Paris is not so much a story, but someone whom you'd think did this and that with their lifes (purely secondary), but primarily probed and licked the various women of his neighborhood. It gets a little boring after while. If Henry Miller conveniently took credit for having written this to make a little quick cash, then it figures because that seems right up his alley as I often have thought Henry Miller was a true opportunist who would live off whoever would be willing to let him. But to his credit, his style of writing is much more imaginary that what this amounts to. If there was such thing as a school for masturbators, this would be required reading.

writers craft laboratory [TRY ON A NEW PAIR OF SHOES ], MAYBE TRY A STAB AT,TITiLATION [SEXY? BIG EASY in the writers laboratory mind EXPERIMENT write for a BLANK A PAGE FILL IT UP a page buckFAST, romp into THE LETHARGICK penisMASURADING AS LIBIDO, not so subtle..DIPICTIONS ofEnCOUNTERS ... empty TOLD OVER AND OVER and back again TO SeX BACK [thru] alleys romps through blind avenues OF THE MIND, FOR FRILLS spellS annomous EXCESS.

... then you need to go to your friendly back-alley novelty store to get yourself a quick fix! This is the first sexy Miller book I've read. (My first read was "Big Sur and the Oranges ...") Page by page, you'll find explicit scenes of unheard of acts of raw sex. ... The side effects of reading "Under the Roofs of Paris" are hard-ons, extreme moisture, and an ever-lasting hunger for that which we most crave. It's easy and fun to read. The language, though very blunt, makes this a quick page turner. Do your sexy side a favor and read Henry Miller.

This is like straight-up porn, for your imagination of course. There is virtually no story. If there is, it certainly gets overshadowed by all the sex. It took me long to read this, and it's because I couldn't get over what was going on. There'd be single paragraphs which I'd read over and over... I guess I couldn't believe my eyes. To think up these things is one thing, but to see it written out, is another entirely. This was one of my train-reading books... while I was commuting to work, I'd read on the train. I read THIS book on the train. I'm a lady. I could never divulge the sort of things I had to do before heading to jobs after reading parts of this book. You can physically feel the things that are going on. It's sick, in a good way. If you're up for any of the things mentioned in here, I'd say this book might make a GREAT gift as well. I highly recommend it.

Mary Jacob Phelps, the inventor of the modern brassiere, re-christened herself Caresse Crosby when she moved to Paris after WWI. She and her husband founded Black Sun Press, which published the work of a number of literary giants.

In Paris during 1933, Caresse met Henry Miller. When he returned to the U.S. in 1940, he confessed to Caresse his lack of success in getting his work published. Miller's autobiographical book Tropic of Cancer was banned as pornographic, and he could get no other work published. She invited him to take a room in her New York apartment where she infrequently lived, which he accepted, though she did not provide him with money.

Miller fell to churning out pornography on commission for an Oklahoma oil baron, but after two 100-page stories that brought him $200, he could do no more. Now he wanted to tour the United States by car and write about it. He had a $750 advance, and persuaded the oil man's agent to advance him another $200. He was preparing to leave on the trip but still have not provided the work promised. He thought then of Caresse Crosby. She was already pitching in ideas and pieces of writing to Anaïs Nin's New York City smut club for fun, not money. Caresse was facile and clever, wrote easily and quickly, with little effort.

Caresse accepted Henry's proposal. She wrote the title given her by Henry Miller "Opus Pistorum" at the top, and started right in. Henry left for his car tour of America. Caresse churned out 200 pages and the collector's agent asked for more.

Caresse's smut was just what the oil man wanted-no literary aspirations-just plain sex. In Caresse the agent had found the basic pornographic Henry Miller. Whenver asked afterwards, Miller strongly denied being the author. Some have mistakenly attributed authorship to Anaïs Nin. But it as Caresse who churned out another 200 pages, spending her time writing while her husband, Bert Young, fell into a drunken stupor every night.

In her diary, Anaïs Nin observed that everyone who wrote pornography with her wrote out of a self that was opposite to her or his identity, but identical with his desire. Caresse experienced years of social constraints imposed by her upper-class association in New York. Polly or Caresse had a doomed and troublesome romanticism with her second husband Harry Crosby before he spectacularly committed suicide/murder with his mistress on December 10, 1929. She participated in a decade or more of intellectual lovers in Paris during the 1920s. Perhaps it was a release for Caresse just to take love as casual lust and let it go at that.

So if you like written smut direct and without literary pretensions or adornments, this is apparently the book for you. Miller's name lends it seeming credibility when in reality it has none, either from its substance or its origins.

This book is a good introduction to Henry's writing. Though if you've read his better stuff ala Black Spring The Tropics, like me, you're probably going to be at least a bit disappointed and want to hurry through it instead of savor his writing like usual.

a prelude to te tropic novels. a journey to the buildup to the better books afterwards

Miller is undeniably one of the literary giants. This is a wonderful and enlightening insight into his sourjorn to that height. It's far from perfect, but to any hardcore Miller fan it will be a treat. They will get a real sense of "the master" chipping away at the almost singular stone that would forever be his muse.

I am glad "Crazy Cock" was printed, because now it is possible for all of us to know what it takes to make a work of art -- that is a lot of hard work. I recommend reading "Sexus", or "Tropic of Cancer" before reading Crazy Cock, since the book itself does not stand up as a work of art. Crazy Cock is a failure as literature, but it is worth the effort to read through it if one has a creative mind which needs inspiration. The work does show Miller's desperate struggle to find a voice, and what is more inspiring is the fact that he found it.

Crazy Cock is Henry Miller's third full length novel and it tells the tale of the triangle between Henry, June and Mara Andrews (aka Jean Kronski). The novel is not very well written, filled with pedantic, prolix and baroque passages, as Miller struggles mightily to find his voice. Miller fans will find this work quite interesting, as it is another variation on The Rosy Crucifixion. However, this book is definately not a good place to start your journey through the works of Henry Miller, as there are many better places to begin (Tropic of Cancer, Air Conditioned Nightmare) your journey.

I found a used copy of this book in a local store. One of the very few Miller's books I did not own, I was eager to read it. It is not often, actually almost unprecedented, that I give up on a book after a few chapters. In case of Miller, this is the first for me. I have been an avid Henry Miller reader for the past fifteen plus years and read anything by him I could lay my hands on. Most of his books even five or six times and I consider Miller to be the main reason why I started writing myself. However, after a few chapters, I could not connect with the story, I could not "live" with the narrator and his voice. It is Miller's writing, and therefore there are gems within the text, but unlike his other works, the narration here appears artificial, almost pushed out with a great effort. I miss the fluidity with which Miller wrote, I miss the rambling, I miss the metaphors. Unfortunately, at this time, I will not continue reading this work. Perhaps, in the future, a time may come when I will try again, but there are many, many more Miller's books I'd rather re-read. It almost hurts me to say I didn't like a book by Miller, especially since his writing has provided me with many sleepless nights when, thinking of his words, I was unable to shut an eye. 99% of his other works are a true inspiration to me and I have the utmost respect for this writer. This one, for me, has missed the mark.

Although, Mr. Miller, was not young when he wrote this novel, he was without a doubt, still in his full mental faculties. I love this man. When you can't sleep at night, or want something to make you laugh, or cry (at times). The works of Henr Miller fits just what you are looking for at all times. Every concievable emotion is in every book by him. Every soul should at least read one of his novels before they die! This man was a truly unrecognized genius and it is a shame that we live in this modern age and still can't give some credit to a man who revolutionized literature for an entire generation

While one may see in this book many of the characteristics, themes and incidents of Miller's writing that would one day cause him to be recognized a true original, if not truely great, I doubt that this is a book that anyone other than a die hard Miller fan would like. It is early stuff for Miller, who was just learning his own voice as a writer, and lacks the exuberance and passion of his later work. It probably will find its place mostly as an item to be studied by Miller scholars but I can't imagine actually reading it for pleasure when one could turn to the later and much better books like the 'Tropic' books and Sexus, Nexus and Plexus.

Some of us think that Miller is a great writer, but he had not yet become one when he wrote this.

This Dell paperback performs a nice bit of service by giving you a pair of Henry James' most significant works: "The Turn Of The Screw," the famous ghost-story novella for which he is best-known today; and "Daisy Miller," another novella that was James' most successful in his lifetime.

I only wish I had enjoyed them. James' style, as I found it, tends to be rather opaque, high-toned, and enervated; smothered in adjectives and lacking in verbs. Fiction-writing from his period can be distant and formal-sounding, but James' feels lost to time in a way others like Conrad and Twain are not.

I probably had the wrong mindset approaching "Turn Of The Screw." This is a famous horror story, read by middle-schoolers. How much of a chore would it be?

Plenty. James frames his story by introducing us to a group of high-toned characters, none of whom we will see again as one of them tells about a story "beyond everything. Nothing I know touches it...for dreadfulness!"

I found this to be true, actually, though not the way James intended. After these few pages of meandering exposition, we meet an unnamed woman hired to be a governess of two cute little kids residing in a pretty English country manor. Various things start to happen to convince the woman that the children are communing with a pair of nasty specters.

Nice idea, but James presents it, intentionally or otherwise, so vaguely that the story loses any real foreboding or suspense. When ghosts appear, they stand on parapets or stare through windows, eyes haunting but the rest of them pretty much inert. Not even the shake of a chain. You never really know anyone in the story; not the kids, cardboard cuties who seem to drift though the narrative chirping noxious Edwardian pleasantries; and not the governess, who sticks by her creepy assignment because she has fallen in love with their uncle, a rich weirdo who requires no matter what happens to the tykes, he never be bothered about them. I guess a good man was hard to find back then.

The end of the book loses a lot of people, but in such a way to make it a favorite of critics. Did the story really happen as presented, or did the governess flip? It's easier to go on about subtext this way when there's so little to the actual text.

"Daisy Miller" is a better tale, crisper and more involving. It's about social mores, and how a young American woman in Europe falls afoul of them. Actually, I thought the story was about a young man who meets an enchanting but impossible flirt, and the way it distends his view of himself and the world around him. But it turns out I was wrong, according to the literary criticism I found online. It's about the girl, and she's not a minx the way I thought, but a truehearted innocent who suffers from the snobby Continentals.

Man, I'm really glad they didn't stick me with this in middle school. "Daisy Miller" left me confused again, and flat, but I did enjoy it until I discovered I was reading a whole different story from what the author wrote. Darn you James, you narrative trickster you!

Jennifer, period 3

This is a review on The turn of the Screw and Daisy Miller by
Henry James. The turn of the Screw is a haunting ghost story of this woman that is a governess and moves into an old English mansion to care for two children Miles, and Flora. The governess start seeing things and she realizes that these people are not human but ghosts and she thinks that they are going to possess the children. This short novel is a horrifying classic ghost story that was actually not bad. The short novel of Daisy Miller is a tale of a governess on vacation with her family in Italy and she falls in deeply in love with her employer. This is a sad love story that Henry makes you use your imagination on. She is swept off her feet by her employer, Frederick Forsyth. But his suspicions about her friendship with an Italian man lead him, and the rest of society, to abandon her. Only after she is dead that he realizes her actions were spontaneous and out of generosity. That is my review on these short novels by Henry James.

esta obra es una novela de ambiguedades, no como otras novelas de henry james que son de ritmo lento y hasta medio aburridas, esta obra es rapida y su brevedad la hace mas deliciosa. al final quedamos con las dudas sobre lo que paso en la casa con los ninos y la maestra. solo nos queda imaginarnos que paso al final y mas alla... muy buena. LUIS MENDEZ

Henry Miller kind of arrived late to the whole expatriate game of the 1920's in which writers like Hemingway and Fitzgerald blazed their way across the literary firmament. By the time Miller had gotten there, America was in the throws of the Great Depression and the shadow of Hitler was beginning to move across Europe. Miller moved to Paris at the instigation, or more likely, manipulation of his wife June. Soon after he met and began a long affair with Anais Nin. In 1935, Miller went to New York, his former home, in pursuit of Nin and produced Aller Retour New York, about his adventures in his old home city.

This book is actually a 77 page letter to his friend Alfred Perles back in Paris. On the surface it seems a letter of hate about the United States. Miller had found his place in France and after that, no other country could come close to him. They were all inferior. He resents the fact that America is new and has no real history. Miller feels more at home with decadence and rot and ruins, decay. He says that "nothing vital was ever begun here....nothing of value." He offers up critiques of the artistic types in Greewich Village by showing up the literary salon hags who vampire off of writers and artists. Miller hates technology and prophecizes about the time when skyscrapers will rule the horizons. I'm sure if he had lived to our day, he would have hated the internet and computers. Most of his hate seems artifical, maybe a defense mechanism that allows him to escape his past, for instance, the first wife and child that he abandoned. Or to do away with what he considers the past, he has to insult it. He has some nice descriptive passages and even though he wrote one thing, you can sense that underneath it, he enjoys writing about New York.

Aller Retour is very instructive in showing the underside of literature, in the sense that for every famous writer around back then, there was a Henry Miller type scumming around in the gutters looking for bare subsistence. It also offers nice vignettes of the artistic life of the time and a glimpse into the philosophy that he lived his life by.

Aller Retour New York.. This book was written between the time of Tropic of Cancer and Tropic of Capricorn. If you are unknown to Henry Miller, I highly recommend that you read Tropic of Cancer first. In this short but good book, Miller reflects on the gay time he has while he is home visiting New York and getting ready to travel back to Paris. His writting style is more like a journal than a novel. He speeks of the I. State building.. the travel back on board a ship over the Atlantic... About the complete emptiness the sea cause a person to have.. about the mindnumbing boredom of life.. The entire novel is just one long letter which he continues over an extended period of time. I am an avid fan of millers way of writting because I connect so much to it, I hope you do too.